Left subclavian artery revascularization in zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair is associated with lower stroke risk across all aortic diseases

Endovascular versus surgical left subclavian artery revascularization with thoracic endovascular aortic repair involving the aortic arch

OBJECTIVE

Left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization has been recommended for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) that require LSA coverage to achieve adequate seal. The aim of this study is to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of endovascular techniques vs surgical methods for LSA revascularization.

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative was queried for patients undergoing TEVAR involving the arch from August 2014 to November 2023. Procedures for descending thoracic aortic aneurysms (DTAAs) and type B aortic dissections (TBADs) were included. Endovascular LSA revascularization techniques (stents, stent grafts, chimneys, fenestrations, stented fenestrations, fenestrated branch, side-arm branched device) and surgical LSA revascularization were compared with respect to 30-day mortality, stroke, stroke or death, spinal cord ischemia, perioperative and 1-year reinterventions, and 1-year survival using both univariate analysis and multivariable analysis controlling for potential confounders.

RESULTS

In a total of 2455 TEVAR procedures done for DTAA and TBAD, LSA revascularization was achieved surgically in 68.8% (n = 1689) and by endovascular techniques in 31.1%. Comparing surgical with endovascular LSA revascularization, there were no differences in 30-day mortality (4.4% vs 4.1%; odds ratio [OR], 1.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-1.71; P = .677), perioperative stroke (4.2% vs 4.6%; OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.58-1.34; P = .557), stroke or death (7.6% vs 6.5%; OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.82-1.64; P = .391), spinal cord ischemia (3.6% vs 2.9%; OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.76-2.07; P = .365), and arm ischemia (1.1% vs 0.5%, P = .614). Overall perioperative reinterventions related to the thoracic aorta or branches or direct procedureal complications were higher in the surgical group compared with the endovascular group (10.7% vs 6.1%; OR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.75-2.45; P < .001). However, reinterventions done specifically for type III endoleaks were notably higher in the endovascular group (16.7% vs 3.2%; P = .008). Predictors of perioperative reinterventions were Black race (OR, 1.36; P = .016), symptomatic presentation (OR, 1.66; P = .001), prior coronary revascularization (OR, 1.56; P = .041), and prior aneurysm repair (OR, 1.58; P = .004). One-year reintervention rates (13.5% vs 13.9%; P = 1.00) and 8-year survival (79.5% vs 78.0%; P = .478) were similar between the surgical and endovascular groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study of over 2400 patients with DTAA or TBAD undergoing TEVAR that required LSA revascularization, endovascular techniques and surgical procedures were similar with regards to perioperative mortality, stroke, spinal cord ischemia, arm ischemia, and 8-year survival. Perioperative aorta-related and branch-related reinterventions were higher among the surgical group, with Black race, prior aneurysm repair, and coronary artery disease being predictors. This suggests that although endovascular techniques have been less often employed for LSA revascularization, they have similar outcomes compared with surgical LSA revascularization with lower rates of overall perioperative reinterventions.

Endovascular Treatment Options for Chronic Dissections

Aortic dissections are classified based on the location of the entry tear. A major concern in chronic aortic dissections is aneurysmal degeneration. Aneurysmal degeneration can lead to aortic expansion and potentially death. False lumen patency is a predictor of outcomes in type B aortic dissections. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) can be used to treat chronic aortic dissections. TEVAR aims to occlude the false lumen to promote thrombosis and favorable aortic remodeling. However, its benefit may be limited in chronic dissection. Several techniques have been developed to treat chronic dissections with TEVAR.

Early Results of a Single-Center Prospective Clinical Trial: In Situ Fenestration System for Aortic Dissection

Objectivestudy aims to assess the clinical efficacy, technical features, and early follow-up outcomes of aortic arch dissection (AD) requiring left subclavian artery (LSA) reconstruction using the aorta arch stent-graft system combined with the endovascular needle system for in situ fenestration.Methods and ResultsEight patients with AD were enrolled in this clinical trial after rigorous screening between July 2021 and August 2022. The 8 patients who participated in this trial were male, with a mean age of 62.0 ± 8.3 years. The total operative time was 148.38 ± 35.06 minutes, and the mean hospitalization time was 11.4 ± 4.4 days. A total of 12 aortic stents were implanted in the 8 patients, and branching stents were implanted in the LSA in all patients. No cases of delayed endoleak occurred. There were no stent- or aorta-related deaths. The 2 deaths that did occur were confirmed to have been due to causes outside of the aorta and were unrelated to the thoracic endovascular aortic repair procedure, with a 1-year stent patency rate of 100%.ConclusionsWe believe that this trial of in situ fenestration achieved satisfactory early results, with reasonable postprocedural stent patency and patient survival, and there were no endoleaks requiring intervention during follow-up. However, long-term follow-up is needed to validate the findings of this trial.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov PRS Protocol Registration and Results System (URL: Home - ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05126446).

Outcomes of a Novel Single-Branched Aortic Stent Graft for Treatment of Type B Aortic Dissection

BACKGROUND

Intervention on type B dissection frequently requires landing the proximal edge of the stent graft between the left common carotid artery and left subclavian artery (LSA). The GORE TAG thoracic branch endoprosthesis is a technology that allows LSA preservation with a single internal branch.

METHODS

This study was a prospective nonrandomized single-arm clinical trial of patients with type B aortic dissection who were treated with the single-branched device. Patients with operative indications for acute, chronic, or residual type B dissections that originated distal to the origin of an LSA suitable for branch graft placement were eligible for the study. Native aortic and surgical graft proximal landing zones were eligible.

RESULTS

Of the 132 patients, there were 25 (18.9%) acute type B dissections, 79 (59.8%) chronic type B dissections, and 28 (21.1%) residual dissections after previous open type A repair. Percutaneous access was used in 105 (79.5%) patients. Overall, 30-day mortality occurred in 6 patients (4.5%). The overall 30-day stroke rate was 2 of 132 (1.5%), and the 1-year freedom from stroke was 96.8%. Device technical success and procedural success were achieved in 129 of 132 (97.7%) and 110 of 132 (83.3%) patients, respectively, and there was 1 instance of loss of side branch patency. No persistent antegrade false lumen flow was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study of a novel branched endograft device to preserve the LSA in patients with type B dissection undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair, we demonstrate acceptable safety and efficacy outcomes at 1 year.

Comparison of Postoperative Outcomes Between Endovascular and Surgical Revascularization of the Left Subclavian Artery in Patients Undergoing Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis aimed to compare postoperative outcomes between endovascular and surgical revascularization of the left subclavian artery (LSA) in patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search of the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases through February 2024. Pooled results were calculated, and subgroup analyses focused on the chimney technique for LSA revascularization. Kaplan-Meier curves for mid-term all-cause mortality were reconstructed by extracting time-to-event data from the included studies.

RESULTS

Twelve nonrandomized studies, including a total of 4158 patients, were analyzed. Procedural duration was significantly longer in the surgical revascularization cohort (p < 0.01). No statistically significant differences were found in other short-term outcomes between the 2 groups. However, subgroup analysis of studies focusing on the chimney technique showed that surgical revascularization was associated with a significantly lower rate of postoperative endoleak [odds ratio; OR (95% confidence interval; CI) = 0.17 (0.06-0.49), p < 0.01]. For mid-term outcomes, there were no significant differences in mortality [hazards ratio; HR (95% CI) = 1.25 (0.71-2.22), p = 0.44], aortic re-intervention rate [HR (95% CI) = 1.10 (0.49-2.47), p = 0.81], or LSA patency rate [HR (95% CI) = 1.24 (0.40-3.89), p = 0.71] between the 2 strategies. The follow-up endoleak rate tended to be lower in the surgical revascularization group [HR (95% CI) = 0.50 (0.24-1.03), p = 0.06], with a more pronounced trend in the subgroup analysis of studies exclusively employing the chimney technique [HR (95% CI) = 0.33 (0.10-1.02), p = 0.05], though the differences were not statistically significant. Reconstructed Kaplan-Meier curves for all-cause mortality indicated no significant difference in mid-term survival between the groups [HR (95% CI) = 0.94 (0.74-1.19), p = 0.60].

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis reveals comparable postoperative outcomes between surgical and endovascular LSA revascularization in patients undergoing TEVAR. However, the chimney technique was associated with a higher rate of postoperative endoleak.Clinical ImpactThis meta-analysis provides insights into the comparative effectiveness of surgical versus endovascular left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). While both techniques demonstrated comparable short- and mid-term outcomes, the chimney stent-graft technique showed a higher incidence of postoperative endoleak, suggesting a need for careful patient selection and follow-up. These findings will guide clinicians in optimizing LSA revascularization strategies and balancing procedural risks with postoperative outcomes in patients requiring LSA coverage during TEVAR.

Anatomical Suitability of a Standard Subclavian Branched Endograft in Previous Zone 2 Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

CLINICAL IMPACT

The present paper highlighted a significant feasibility rate for the Gore Thoracic Branch Endoprothesis among patients previously treated with TEVAR and proximal landing in zone. The limited number of stent-graft configurations that could have been implanted in a considerable portion of our cohort could help clinicians to develop a proper endovascular inventory related to this device, paving the way for its wide application.

Comparative Analysis of Endovascular Repair of Single-Branched Stent-Graft and Hybrid Procedure for Patients With Type B Acute Aortic Dissection Involving the Left Subclavian Artery

PURPOSE

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization has been used in patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD), with inadequate proximal landing zone (PLZ). The outcomes of comparisons between TEVAR and hybrid procedure on patients with TBAD, with inadequate PLZ, are rarely reported. This study sought to compare and clarify the early and midterm outcomes between TEVAR and hybrid procedure in patients with TBAD, with inadequate PLZ.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2019 and December 2021, 93 patients with TBAD, with inadequate PLZ, who underwent TEVAR or hybrid procedure, were retrospectively evaluated in Beijing Anzhen hospital. Demographics, comorbidities, preoperative imaging features, periprocedural details, and follow-up outcomes were analyzed. Survival was analyzed according to Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

TEVAR procedures were performed on 41 patients (TEVAR group) and hybrid procedures on 52 patients (hybrid group). Early events, 30 day mortality, and all-cause mortality, were not significantly different between the 2 groups. However, patients receiving TEVAR had significantly shorter procedure time (p<0.001), hospital stay (p<0.001), and intensive care unit (ICU) stay (p=0.001) compared with those in the hybrid group. Patients receiving TEVAR had significantly lower midterm events (p=0.014) and re-intervention (p=0.015) compared with those in the hybrid group.

CONCLUSION

The study indicated that TEVAR with LSA revascularization for TBAD with inadequate PLZ is associated with a trend toward lower rates of midterm events, while the early and midterm mortalities were comparable with those in hybrid procedure.

CLINICAL IMPACT

This study is novel as it compared the outcomes between thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and hybrid procedure in patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD), with inadequate proximal landing zone, which has been rarely reported previously. We believe that our study makes a significant contribution to the literature because it is clinically relevant as it demonstrated that TEVAR with left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization for TBAD with inadequate proximal landing zone is associated with a trend toward lower rates of mid-term events, while the early and mid-term mortalities were comparable with those in the hybrid procedure.

Predicting the need for subclavian artery revascularization in thoracic endovascular aortic repair: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to investigate the effectiveness of left subclavian artery revascularization compared with non-revascularization in thoracic endovascular aortic repair, and to summarize the current evidence on its indications.

METHODS

A computerized search was conducted across multiple databases, including MEDLINE, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, for studies published up to November 2023. Study selection, data abstraction, and quality assessment (using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale) were independently conducted by two reviewers, with a third author resolving discrepancies. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models and publication bias was assessed using funnel plots.

RESULTS

In the 76 included studies, left subclavian artery revascularization was associated with reduced risks of stroke (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.45-0.98; n = 15,331), spinal cord ischemia (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.56-0.99; n = 11,995), and arm ischemia (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01-0.59; n = 8438). No significant reduction in paraplegia (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.21-1.47; n = 1802) or mortality (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.53-1.12; n = 11,831) was observed. Moreover, the risk of endoleak was comparable in both groups (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.55-2.84; P = .60; n = 793), whereas the risk of reintervention was significantly higher in the revascularization group (OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.03-3.83; P = .04; n = 272). Both groups had similar risks of major (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.19-1.09; P = .08; n = 1113), minor (OR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.01-3.45; P = .27; n = 183), renal (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.12-3.06; P = .55; n = 310), and pulmonary (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.16-2.15; P = .42; n = 8083) complications. The most frequent indications for left subclavian artery revascularization were primary prevention of spinal cord ischemia, augmentation of the landing zone, and primary stroke prevention.

CONCLUSIONS

Left subclavian artery revascularization in thoracic endovascular aortic repair was associated with reduced neurological complications but was not found to impact mortality. The study highlights important indications for revascularization as well as significant predictors of complications, providing a basis for clinical decision-making and future research.

Spinal cord ischemia and reinterventions following thoracic endovascular repair for acute type B aortic dissections

OBJECTIVE

The technical aspects of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD), specifically the location of proximal seal zone (PSZ) (need to cover the left subclavian artery [LSA]), distal seal zone (DSZ) (length of aortic coverage), benefit of LSA revascularization, and prophylactic lumbar drainage are still debated. Each of these issues has potential benefits but also has known risks. This study aims to identify factors associated with reintervention and spinal cord ischemia (SCI) following TEVAR for acute TBAD with a zone 3 entry tear.

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative was queried for TEVARs performed for acute TBAD with zone 3 entry tear, zone 3 proximal zone of disease, treated with TEVAR extending between zone 2 and zone 5. The primary outcomes were SCI and related reintervention. Secondary outcomes were stroke, arm ischemia, and retrograde type A dissection (RTAD). The exposure variables were PSZ 2 vs 3, DSZ 4 vs 5, prophylactic lumbar drain, and LSA revascularization. Univariate analyses were conducted with χ2 analysis, and multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate association with outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 583 patients who met inclusion criteria, 266 had PSZ 2 and 317 had PSZ 3. On univariate analysis, PSZ 2 was associated with a higher rate of reintervention, but PSZ2 was not significant on multivariable analysis after accounting for age, sex, race, smoking, PSZ, DSZ, prophylactic lumbar drain, and LSA patency. PSZ 2 was not associated with SCI, arm ischemia, or RTAD. PSZ 2 was associated with a trend towards a higher rate of stroke. DSZ 4 and DSZ 5 were performed in 161 and 422 TEVARs, respectively, and DSZ 5 was associated with a higher rate of SCI on univariate (3 [1.9%] vs 39 [9.2%]; P = .01) and multivariable (odds ratio, 7.384; 95% confidence interval, 2.193-24.867; P = .001) analyses. Prophylactic lumbar drain placement was not statistically significantly associated with SCI, but lack of postoperative LSA patency was associated with SCI (odds ratio, 2.966; 95% confidence interval, 1.016-8.656; P = .05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that PSZ 2 was not associated with lower reinterventions or higher rates of SCI but trended towards a higher rate of stroke than PSZ 3. Additionally, DSZ 5 was strongly associated with SCI when compared with DSZ 4, highlighting the importance of limiting aortic coverage to coverage of the proximal entry tear when possible.

Hemodynamic changes for half cover left subclavian artery ostium during thoracic endovascular aortic repair

Purpose

Some clinicians use endografts to cover half the left subclavian artery (LSA) ostium to cure some cases with insufficient proximal landing zone (PLZ) in thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) treatment. We used computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to study the hemodynamic changes in the LSA because they may cause acute thrombosis or arteriosclerosis.

Methods

The digital model of the aortic arch was established and named model A, which only included the supraarch branch of the LSA. By directly covering half of the LSA ostium, which was named as model B. All established models were imported into the Gambit grid division software for grid division and were subsequently imported into the Fluent software for hemodynamic numerical simulation and calculation to analyze the related changes in LSA hemodynamic parameters after stent implantation.

Results

Under the same aortic inlet flow, in model B, the local blood flow velocity of the LSA ostium increased and the whole blood flow velocity at the distal end decreased. The average wall shear stress (WSS) of the LSA was significantly decreased. Meanwhile there was an obvious turbulent flow in the LSA lumen, and the related blood flow state was disordered.

Conclusion

CFD research confirmed that the implantation of an endograft covering half the LSA ostium can cause obvious hemodynamic changes, which is likely to cause a long-term arteriosclerosis or acute thrombosis of the LSA, finally increasing the risk of stroke. Once this operation is performed in some specific clinical cases for simplicity and economy, it seems that we should actively antiplatelet and follow up regularly.

Initial Outcomes of the Gore TAG Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis for Endovascular Repair of Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury

BACKGROUND

Endovascular repair of blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) has dramatically reduced the morbidity and mortality of intervention. Injuries requiring zone 2 coverage of the aorta traditionally require left subclavian artery (LSA) sacrifice or open revascularization. Furthermore, these injuries are associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality and long-term morbidity. Here we report 1-year outcomes of total endovascular repair of BTAI with the GORE® TAG® Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis for LSA preservation.

METHODS

Across 34 investigative sites, 9 patients with BTAI requiring LSA coverage were enrolled in a nonrandomized, prospective study of a single-branched aortic endograft. The thoracic branch endoprosthesis device allows for graft placement proximal to the LSA and incorporates a single side branch for LSA perfusion.

RESULTS

This initial cohort included 8 male and 1 female patient with a median age of 43 (22, 76) and 12 months of follow-up. Five total years of follow-up are planned. All participants had grade 3 BTAI. All procedures took place between 2018 and 2019. The median injury severity score was 2 (0, 66). The median procedure time was 109 min (78, 162). All aortic injuries were repaired under general anesthesia and with heparinization. A spinal drain was used in one patient. Post-deployment balloon angioplasty was conducted in one case at the distal landing zone. There was one asymptomatic LSA branch occlusion 6 months after repair. It was attributed to the purposeful proximal deployment of the branch stent to accommodate an early vertebral takeoff. The occlusion did not require revascularization. There were no strokes, mortalities, or aortic adverse events (migration, endoleak, native aortic expansion, dissection, or thrombosis) through 12 months of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Initial cohort outcomes suggest that endovascular repair of zone 2 BTAI is feasible and has favorable outcomes using the thoracic branch device with LSA preservation. Additional cases and longer-term follow-up are required for a definitive assessment of the device's safety and durability in traumatic aortic injuries.

Optimal antiplatelet therapy after revascularization of left subclavian artery during TEVAR

BACKGROUND

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is a minimally invasive technique used to treat type B aortic dissections. Left subclavian artery (LSA) reconstruction is required when treating patients with involvement of LSA. The best antiplatelet therapy after LSA reconstruction is presently uncertain.

METHODS

This study retrospectively analyzed 245 type B aortic dissection patients who underwent left subclavian artery revascularization during TEVAR. Out of 245 patients, 159 (64.9%) were in the single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) group, receiving only aspirin, and 86 (35.1%) were in the dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) group, receiving aspirin combined with clopidogrel. During the 6-month follow-up, primary endpoints included hemorrhagic events (general bleeding and hemorrhagic strokes), while secondary endpoints comprised ischemic events (left upper limb ischemia, ischemic stroke, and thrombotic events), as well as death and leakage events. Both univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed on hemorrhagic and ischemic events, with the Kaplan-Meier method used to generate the survival curve.

RESULTS

During the six-month follow-up, the incidence of hemorrhagic events in the DAPT group was higher (8.2% vs. 30.2%, P < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in ischemic events, death, or leakage events among the different antiplatelet treatment schemes. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that DAPT (HR: 2.22, 95% CI: 1.07-4.60, P = 0.032) and previous chronic conditions (HR:3.88, 95% CI: 1.24-12.14, P = 0.020) significantly affected the occurrence of hemorrhagic events. Chronic conditions in this study encompassed depression, vitiligo, and cholecystolithiasis. Carotid subclavian bypass (CSB) group (HR:0.29, 95% CI: 0.12-0.68, P = 0.004) and single-branched stent graft (SBSG) group (HR:0.26, 95% CI: 0.13-0.50, P < 0.001) had a lower rate of ischemic events than fenestration TEVAR (F-TEVAR). Survival analysis over 6 months revealed a lower risk of bleeding associated with SAPT during hemorrhagic events (P = 0.043).

CONCLUSIONS

In type B aortic dissection patients undergoing LSA blood flow reconstruction after synchronous TEVAR, the bleeding risk significantly decreases with the SAPT regimen, and there is no apparent ischemic compensation within 6 months. Patients with previous chronic conditions have a higher risk of bleeding. The CSB group and SBSG group have less ischemic risk compared to F-TEVAR group.

Comparison of Outcomes Between Right and Left Upper Extremity Access in Endovascular Aortic Repair for Patients with Thoracoabdominal and Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Traditionally, left-sided upper extremity (LUE) access has been preferred in patients undergoing endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) to manage aortic aneurysms and decrease the risk of cerebrovascular adverse events. Recently, right-sided upper extremity access (RUE) has gained popularity owing to its greater maneuverability and ergonomics. However, synthesized data comparing the safety and efficacy of RUE and LUE accesses are limited. A comprehensive literature search was conducted on various databases from inception to September 2023 to retrieve all studies that compared RUE and LUE access in EVAR. Data on stroke, 30-day mortality, technical success, access-site complications, total time required for fluoroscopy, and contrast agent requirement were extracted, pooled, and analyzed. Forest plots were generated using a random-effects model on review manager by pooling the risk ratios (RRs) and standard mean differences (SMDs). Ten observational studies with a total of 3994 patients were included in our analysis with 1186 patients in the RUE and 2808 patients in the LUE access groups. EVAR using RUE access was associated with a significantly lower amount of contrast agent requirement than the LUE access group [SMD, -0.23; 95% confidence interval (CI), -0.45 to -0.02; P = 0.03]. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of the risk of stroke (RR, 1.62; 95% CI, 0.81-3.22; P = 0.17), 30-day mortality (RR, 1.42; 95% CI, 0.50-4.06; P = 0.51), rate of technical success (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.95-1.01; P = 0.18), risk of access-site complications (RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.72-1.39; P = 0.99), and total time required for fluoroscopy (SMD, 0.07; 95% CI, -0.39 to 0.26; P = 0.69). The use of RUE access in EVAR appears to be comparable to LUE access in terms of the risk of stroke, access-related complications, all-cause mortality, technical success rate, and fluoroscopy duration. The RUE group required a lower volume of contrast agent.

How I do it: Established and novel methods for left subclavian revascularization with thoracic endovascular aortic repair

Left subclavian artery revascularization at the time of thoracic endovascular aortic repair has been the subject of discussion for over a decade. Contemporary viewpoints suggest that revascularization should be performed where possible to decrease the risk of perioperative stroke, spinal cord ischemia, and, to a lesser degree, loss of upper extremity function. In this article, we present traditional methods as well as descriptions of newer options and technology for preservation of left subclavian artery flow during thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

Subclavian artery revascularization with subclavian-carotid transposition for TEVAR and non-TEVAR patients

BACKGROUND

Subclavian artery revascularization (SAR) has become an increasingly performed technique in patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (TEVAR), in order to optimize the proximal landing zone, or in patients with significant atherosclerotic diseases. SAR was usually achieved through carotid-subclavian bypass (CSB) which is daunted by graft and patency-related issues, or through subclavian carotid transposition (SCT) which has recently been reconsidered as a potential solution. Nowadays, multiple endovascular strategies including parallel grafts, chimney graft and branch-fenestrated repair, are available in patients unfit for open SAR. However, there is no consensus on the preferable technique in both TEVAR- and non TEVAR-patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate our experience with SCT in terms of overall postoperative adverse events and mid-term patency rate.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study, including all patients who underwent SCT between June 2014 and March 2020 at our Division. Preoperative risk factors, symptoms, intraoperative details, postoperative outcomes and follow-up data were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 27 patients were included in this study. Indications for SCT included aortic arch debranching for TEVAR for thoracic aortic aneurysm and type B dissection and symptomatic subclavian steal syndrome (SSS). There were no major perioperative adverse events or major neurological complications; five minor adverse events occurred (18.5%) (3 Horner' Syndrome, 1 hematoma requiring reoperation,1 pneumothorax). Peripheral nerve injuries and lymphatic lesions were not recorded. On a mean follow-up of 21±16 months, SCT patency was confirmed in all patients and no deaths occurred. Comparison of baseline and operative characteristics and intraoperative details between groups of patients with or without adverse events did not found differences.

CONCLUSIONS

SCT should be considered a feasible, effective and safe technique for SAR, with low perioperative complications and optimal mid-term patency. This surgical technique appears to provide a lower risk of neurological events and mortality, particularly in TEVAR patients, reducing the complications caused by the coverage of the left subclavian artery.

Treatment for Stanford type B aortic dissection with insufficient anchoring region using castor integrated branched aortic stent graft

Background

To investigate the clinical efficacy of Castor integrated branched aortic stent graft for the treatment of Stanford type B aortic dissection with insufficient anchoring area.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of clinical data of 26 patients with Stanford type B aortic dissection with insufficient anchoring region (<15 mm) treated by Castor branched aortic stent graft from September 2018 to June 2022 at Ganzhou People's Hospital, including 23 acute cases and 3 chronic cases.

Results

Surgical procedures were successfully performed in all 26 patients, and during the perioperative period no complications occurred, such as cerebrovascular accident, stenosis or occlusion of left subclavian artery, progression of reverse avulsion of aortic dissection, and paraplegia. During the operation 2 patients had a small amount of type I endoleak, which disappeared during the postoperative follow-up. The other patients had good postoperative follow-up results. Review of the aortic CTA indicated good stent morphology with patency of the left subclavian artery.

Conclusions

The Castor integrated branched aortic stent graft expanded the indications for endoluminal treatment for Stanford type B aortic dissection, which can avoid open surgery and has good clinical outcomes.

Left subclavian artery coverage during emergent TEVAR in a patient with ipsilateral functional arteriovenous fistula

Coverage of the left subclavian artery origin is required to achieve adequate proximal seal during up to 40% of TEVAR cases. The evidence regarding left subclavian artery revascularization in patients undergoing elective or emergent TEVAR with left subclavian artery coverage is weak, and there is ongoing debate whether revascularization should be performed routinely of selectively. Beyond this debate, there is a lack of data about left subclavian artery coverage during TEVAR in end-stage renal disease patients with a functional left upper limb atreriovenous fistula. We present the case of a patient with a left distal radiocephalic arteriovenous fistula who underwent emergent TEVAR with left subclavian artery coverage for ruptured type B aortic dissection. The arteriovenous fistula remains functional on a 3-month follow-up, and the patient did not develop symptoms related to posterior stroke, spinal cord ischemia, limb ischemia, or vertebrobasilar insufficiency.

The impact of urgency of repair on outcomes following thoracic endovascular aortic repair for blunt thoracic aortic injury

OBJECTIVE

Current societal recommendations regarding the timing of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) vary. Prior studies have shown that elective repair was associated with lower mortality after TEVAR for BTAI. However, these studies lacked data such as Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) aortic injury grades and TEVAR-related postoperative outcomes. Therefore, we used the Vascular Quality Initiative registry, which includes relevant anatomic and outcome data, to examine the outcomes following urgent/emergent (≤ 24 hours) vs elective TEVAR for BTAI.

METHODS

Patients undergoing TEVAR for BTAI between 2013 and 2022 were included, excluding those with SVS grade 4 aortic injuries. We included covariates such as age, sex, race, transfer status, body mass index, preoperative hemoglobin, comorbidities, medication use, SVS aortic injury grade, coexisting injuries, Glasgow Coma Scale, and prior aortic surgery in a regression model to compute propensity scores for assignment to urgent/emergent or elective TEVAR. Perioperative outcomes and 5-year mortality were evaluated using inverse probability-weighted logistic regression and Cox regression, also adjusting for left subclavian artery revascularization/occlusion and annual center and physician volumes.

RESULTS

Of 1016 patients, 102 (10%) underwent elective TEVAR. Patients who underwent elective repair were more likely to undergo revascularization of the left subclavian artery (31% vs 7.5%; P < .001) and receive intraoperative heparin (94% vs 82%; P = .002). After inverse probability weighting, there was no association between TEVAR timing and perioperative mortality (elective vs urgent/emergent: 3.9% vs 6.6%; odds ratio [OR], 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-4.7; P = .90) and 5-year mortality (5.8% vs 12%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.21-4.3; P > .9).Compared with urgent/emergent TEVAR, elective repair was associated with lower postoperative stroke (1.0% vs 2.1%; adjusted OR [aOR], 0.12; 95% CI, 0.02-0.94; P = .044), even after adjusting for intraoperative heparin use (aOR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.02-0.92; P = .042). Elective TEVAR was also associated with lower odds of failure of extubation immediately after surgery (39% vs 65%; aOR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.09-0.35; P < .001) and postoperative pneumonia (4.9% vs 11%; aOR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.13-0.91; P = .031), but comparable odds of any postoperative complication as a composite outcome and reintervention during index admission.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with BTAI who underwent elective TEVAR were more likely to receive intraoperative heparin. Perioperative mortality and 5-year mortality rates were similar between the elective and emergent/urgent TEVAR groups. Postoperatively, elective TEVAR was associated with lower ischemic stroke, pulmonary complications, and prolonged hospitalization. Future modifications in society guidelines should incorporate the current evidence supporting the use of elective TEVAR for BTAI. The optimal timing of TEVAR in patients with BTAI and the factors determining it should be the subject of future study to facilitate personalized decision-making.

Aortic Arch Debranching and Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) for Type B Aortic Dissection

BACKGROUND

Since its introduction, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has revolutionized the treatment of type B aortic dissections (TBADs). However, the proximal aspect of the aortic pathology treated may infringe on the origin of the left subclavian artery or even more proximally. Hence, to ensure durable outcomes, the origin of these vessels needs to be covered, but an extra-anatomical bypass is required to perfuse vital branches, known as aortic arch debranching. This series aims to describe and delineate the disparities of aortic arch debranching during TEVAR for TBAD.

METHODS

A retrospective review and analysis of a multicenter international database was conducted to identify patients with TBAD treated with TEVAR between 2005 and 2021. Data analyzed included patient demographics, disease characteristics, operative characteristics, and postoperative outcomes with follow-up on mortality and reintervention. All statistical analyses were carried out using IBM SPSS 26. Patient survival was calculated using a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, and a P value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

A total of 58 patients were included in the analysis, of which 27 (46.6%) presented with complicated disease and 31 were uncomplicated, of which 10 (17.2%) were classed as high risk and 21 (36.2%) low risk. Zone 2 was the most common proximal landing zone for the stent graft. Left subclavian artery bypass was performed selectively (26%), with 1 stroke occurring, likely due to embolic reasons. A further 6 underwent more proximal aortic debranching before TEVAR (10%) and was a significant risk factor for mortality and the number of stents deployed. The overall rates of reintervention and mortality were 17.2% (n = 10) and 29.3% (n = 17).

CONCLUSIONS

Aortic arch debranching and TEVAR for TBAD is associated with significant mortality. Future developments to treat aortic arch pathology could incorporate branched graft devices, eliminating the need for debranching, improving stroke rates, and reducing future reinterventions.

Efficacy of Endovascular Repair Using Single Left Common Carotid Artery Stent Combined with Castor Single-Branched Stent-Graft in the Treatment of Regional Diseases of Zone 2 of the Aorta

PURPOSE

To observe the short-term efficacy of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) using a single left common carotid artery chimney stent combined with a Castor single-branched stent-graft (SC-TEVAR) in the treatment of zone 2 (Z2) aortic diseases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

To conduct a retrospective analysis of 20 patients with Z2 aortic diseases who were treated in our department from June 2021 to April 2022. The lesions included true aortic degenerative aneurysms with diameter ≥5.0 cm and penetrating aortic ulcers with depth >1.0 cm or basal width >2.0 cm. All 20 patients accepted the SC-TEVAR treatment, which was a new hybrid method to assure the flow of the left common carotid artery (LCCA) and left subclavian artery (LSA). This method was defined as a concomitant chimney stent for LCCA and a Castor single-branched stent graft for the aorta and LSA. The baseline data and intraoperative data were collected to evaluate the safety and efficacy of this method. The patency of the target blood vessel and any associated complications were evaluated at 1 and 6 months postoperatively, to analyze the safety and efficacy of this new method.

RESULTS

After discharge from the hospital, all patients were followed up by a specific follow-up team. At 6 monthly follow-up period, there were no cardiac events, stroke, hemiplegia, type I endoleak, type II endoleak, proximal stent graft-induced new entries, distal stent graft-induced new entries, wound infection, or bleeding. Only 1 patient developed an inguinal wound hematoma and got conservative treatment. Importantly, no patients developed stenosis or occlusion of the LCCA or LSA. The patency of branched arteries was 100%. The technical success rate was 90%.

CONCLUSION

SC-TEVAR appears to be a new and relatively simple, safe, and effective treatment for Z2 aortic diseases.

CLINICAL IMPACT

This was a single-center retrospective cohort study. A total of 20 patients with zone 2 aortic diseases accepted a new hybrid surgical method named SC-TEVAR. This method was not complicated and could be finished with only 3 peripheral artery exposure. The result showed no mortality, 100% patency of the branch artery, and 90% of technical success in 6 months of follow-up time. SC-TEVAR showed a satisfactory result in this retrospective study and could be promoted as an easy method to treat zone 2 aortic diseases.

Short-term follow-up of proximal aorta remodeling after zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair for acute type B aortic dissection

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the early remodeling of the proximal aorta in patients with acute type B aortic dissection (ATBAD) after zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

METHODS

From January 2016 to May 2022, 53 ATBAD patients underwent zone 2 TEVAR were divided into two groups, the Castor single-branched stent-graft (CSS) group (n = 26) and the common stent-graft group (n = 27). Three-dimensional imaging created by computed tomography angiography was used to measure different parameters of the aorta, such as angulation, cross-sectional area (CSA), length and tortuosity. Early remodeling of the proximal aorta was evaluated by comparing geometric parameters of the proximal aorta before and 3 months after surgery.

RESULTS

In terms of angle, the postoperative angle of aortic arch to ascending aorta, descending aorta increased in all patients compared with that before surgery (all P < 0.05), while the angle of aortic arch to left subclavian artery increased after surgery only in the CSS group (P < 0.001); As for CSA, the CSA of distal aortic arch and true lumen increased (all P < 0.05), while the CSA of false lumen decreased in both groups after operation (all P < 0.05); Only in CSS group, the CSA of the ascending aorta, proximal aortic arch and total descending thoracic aorta decreased after surgery (all P < 0.05); In terms of length, the aortic arch prolonged after operation in both groups (P = 0.018 and P = 0.004, respectively). In addition, the ascending aorta tortuosity decreased in the CSS group after surgery (P = 0.011). There was no significant difference in the alterations of other aortic parameters after operation (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The CSS implantation provided a more relatively safe and effective treatment for acute type B aortic dissection patients with unfavorable proximal landing zone. It can promote the earlier remodeling of the proximal aorta compared with the common stent-graft implantation after zone 2 TEVAR.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection with aberrant right subclavian artery: a single-center retrospective study

Objective

To evaluate the outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for type B aortic dissection (TBAD) with aberrant right subclavian artery (ARSA).

Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients with TBAD and ARSA who underwent TEVAR between the period of January 2017 and December 2022. Patient demographics, computed tomography angiography (CTA) measurements, surgical procedures, and postoperative outcomes were reviewed.

Results

A total of 9 patients (6 males and 3 females) were included in the study. 4 ARSA were reconstructed, 3 by periscope technique and 1 by in vitro fenestration technique. 3 left subclavian arteries (LSA) were reconstructed, 1 by the chimney technique and 2 by the single-branched stent technique. 2 patients underwent reconstruction of both ARSA and LSA. The overall technical success rate was 100%, with no occurrences of stroke, paraplegia, or mortality within 30 days. 1 patient experienced immediate type Ia endoleak, which resolved after 3 months. 1 patient developed weakness in the right upper limb, while 1 patient presented mild subclavian steal syndrome (SSS); both cases showed recovery during follow-up. The average follow-up duration was 35.6 ± 11.1 months, during which no reinterventions, deaths, or strokes were observed.

Conclusion

Our limited experience involving 9 patients demonstrates that early and mid-term outcomes of TEVAR for the treatment of TBAD with ARSA are satisfactory.

Endovascular treatment of type B aortic dissection in patients with end-stage renal disease

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the postoperative and intermediate outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD) undergoing TEVAR at our single center from January 2010 to December 2020. Patients with pre-existing ESRD were enrolled as the study group. One hundred consecutive patients from September 2013 to March 2015 without ESRD were included as the control group. The primary and secondary outcomes were adverse events and survival, respectively. Kaplan-Meier curves of survival and freedom from adverse events were calculated and analyzed using the log-rank univariate test. Multivariable analysis was used to isolate the effects of ESRD.

RESULTS

A total of 39 patients with ESRD and TBAD underwent TEVAR during the study period. The median follow-up time of patients with and without ESRD was 45 and 46 months, respectively. There was significant difference between the survival at 4 years of patients with and without ESRD (72.8% vs 94.9%; p = 0.011). Meanwhile, the incidence of adverse events was significantly higher in patients with ESRD (p = 0.026). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that ESRD (OR, 2.46; p = 0.049) and peripheral artery disease (OR, 4.11; p = 0.002) were the predictors of adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The rates of adverse events and survival expectancy were poor in patients with ESRD and TBAD.

Comparison of surgical and endovascular left subclavian artery revascularization during thoracic aortic endovascular repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to incorporate data from the latest clinical studies and compare the safety and efficacy of surgical left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization and endovascular LSA revascularization during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

METHODS

This study was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and was registered with the PROSPERO database on 16 April 2023 (CRD42023414579). The Embase, MEDLINE (PubMed), and the Cochrane Library databases were searched from January 2000 to May 2023.

RESULTS

A total of 14 retrospective cohort studies with a total of 1,695 patients, were included for review. The peri-operative stroke rates of the surgical and endovascular LSA revascularization groups were 3.8% and 2.6%, respectively (P = 0.97). The peri-operative technical success rates for the surgical and endovascular LSA revascularization groups were 95.6% and 93.0%, respectively (P = 0.24). The peri-operative spinal cord ischemia rates were 1.6% (n = 18) and 1.9% (n = 7) in the surgical and endovascular LSA revascularization groups, respectively (P = 0.90). The peri-operative type Ⅰ endoleak rates for the surgical and endovascular LSA revascularization groups were 6.6% and 23.2%, respectively (P = 0.25). The subgroup analysis showed that the incidence of peri-operative type I endoleak in the parallel stent group was significantly higher than that in the surgical LSA revascularization group (P < 0.0001). The peri-operative left upper limb ischemia rates for the surgical and endovascular LSA revascularization groups were 1.2% and 0.6%, respectively (P = 0.96). The peri-operative mortality rates of the surgical and endovascular LSA revascularization groups were 2.0% and 2.0%, respectively (P = 0.88).

CONCLUSION

There was no significant difference in the terms of short-term outcomes when comparing the two revascularization techniques. The quality of evidence assessed by GRADE scale was low to very-low. Surgical and endovascular LSA revascularization during TEVAR were both safe and effective. Compared with surgical LSA revascularization techniques, parallel stent revascularization of LSA significantly increased the rate of type I endoleak.

Hemodynamics of different configurations of the left subclavian artery parallel stent graft for thoracic endovascular aortic repair

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Parallel (chimney and periscope) graft technique is an effective approach for left subclavian artery (LSA) reconstruction in patients treated by thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for the inadequate landing zone. However, certain stent graft (SG) configurations may promote thrombosis and reduce distal blood flow, increasing risks of cerebral infarction and reintervention.

METHODS

In this paper, we first attempt to systematically evaluate the hemodynamic performances of different parallel graft techniques as potential determinants of complication risks. Based on the patient-specific 3D aortic geometry undergoing parallel graft technique, fifteen models in total for five kinds of LSA branched SG configurations (Forward, Backward, Extended, Elliptical and Periscopic) were designed virtually, and the hemodynamic discrepancies between them were analyzed by computational fluid dynamics.

RESULTS

Results show that flow rate of patients undergoing periscope technique reduces by half compared with chimney technique, suggesting that periscope SG may cause more serious flow obstruction to LSA, leading to stroke. For chimney stent structure, the extension length 0has little influence on energy loss and other parameters. Conversely, hemodynamic differences between the retrograde curvature and the antegrade curvature are significant (time average WSS: 47.07%), so the retrograde curvature might prompt SG displacement. Furthermore, the flatter chimney SG induces more aggressive hemodynamic forces, among which the difference of the maximum WSS between the flatter SG and nearly round SG reaches 65.56%, leading to the greater risk of vascular wall damage.

CONCLUSIONS

Results obtained might provide suggestions for physicians to formulate appropriate parallel graft technique schemes in TEVAR.

Anatomic Utility of Single Branched Thoracic Endograft During Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

INTRODUCTION

Single branched thoracic endografts (SBTEs) have been designed for pathology requiring zone 2 seal during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Numerous criteria must be met to allow for their implantation. Our aim was to analyze anatomic suitability for a next generation SBTE.

METHODS

We reviewed 150 TEVAR procedures between 2015 and 2019. Proximal seal was: zone 0 in 21 (16%), zone 1 in 4 (3%), zone 2 in 52 (40%), zone 3 in 45 (35%), and zone 4 or distal in 7 (5%). We analyzed the Zone 2 patient's angiograms and CT angiograms using centerline software to measure arterial diameters and length in relation to the left common carotid artery (LCCA), left subclavian artery (LSA) and proximal extent of aortic disease to determine if patients met anatomic criteria of a novel SBTE.

RESULTS

Zone 2 average age was 64.4 ± 16.3 years; 34 patients were male (65%). Indications for repair were aneurysm (N = 9, 17%), acute dissection (N = 14, 27%), chronic dissection with aneurysmal degeneration (N = 7, 13%), intramural hematoma (N = 9, 17%), penetrating aortic ulcer (N = 5, 10%), and blunt traumatic aortic injury (BTAI, N = 8, 15%). LSA revascularization occurred in 27 patients (52%). Overall, 20 (38.5%) of the zone 2 patients met anatomic criteria. Patients with dissection met anatomic criteria less frequently than aneurysm (33% [10 of 30] vs 64% [9 of 14]). Patients treated for BTAI rarely met the anatomic criteria (1 of 8, 13%). The main anatomic constraints were an inadequate distance from the LCCA to the LSA takeoff and from the LCCA to the start of the aortic disease process.

CONCLUSION

Less than half of patients who require seal in zone 2 met criteria for this SBTE. Patients with aneurysms met anatomic criteria more often than those with dissection. The device would have little applicability in treating patients with BTAI.

Experience with the Ankura Thoracic Stent Graft and In-situ Fenestration for the Left Subclavian Artery with the Fu-Through Needle - a Technical Overview and Comparison to Similar Endovascular Techniques

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is a widespread minimally invasive procedure prevalently used to treat thoracic aortic pathologies. However, when the left subclavian artery (LSA) is involved in the pathology, a more complex surgical approach is required to guarantee the perfusion of the vertebral and brachial arteries. In fact, coverage of the LSA has been proven to be associated with a higher risk of stroke, spinal cord ischemia, and arm ischemia.Historically, carotid-subclavian bypass or subclavian transposition has been the only treatment options to restore the perfusion of the LSA. For the past 10 years, different endovascular techniques have been implemented in the endovascular armamentarium to reduce the risk of complications related to surgical treatment such as infection, bleeding, and chylothorax.Currently, physician-modified grafts, in situ fenestration, chimneys, and branched or fenestrated devices are available. The aim of this overview is to describe the technique with the Ankura thoracic stent graft and in situ fenestration with the Futhrough needle and thus to shed light on the different approaches by comparing their pros and cons.

Endovascular aortic arch repair: A comparison of outcomes and current trends

OBJECTIVE

Application of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) to the aortic arch has been met with the development of purpose-made endoprostheses for on-label use in the aortic arch. An appraisal of the clinical efficacy of each major device is therefore useful towards informing clinical decision making for patients eligible for endovascular arch repair (EAR) rather than open surgical reconstruction.

METHODS

A literature review of publications outlining clinical experience with the RELAY™ Branched and Zenith™ devices was undertaken, and the results therefrom analysed to evaluate the clinical efficacies of each device.

RESULTS

Early- and long-term mortality rates associated with EAR appear favourable, especially compared against open surgical repair. EAR is also associated with good neurological outcomes and target vessel patency rates. However, EAR continues to be associated with substantial reintervention rates.

CONCLUSIONS

At the present stage, EAR represents a promising alternative option to open surgical reconstruction in patients that meet its eligibility criteria. Though there remains a substantial learning curve associated with EAR, its favourable outcome profile is likely to increase its applicability in the future.

Laser Fenestration in TEVAR - Perspectives and Future Directions

Endovascular aortic repair has been increasingly utilized to treat a multitude of thoracic aortic pathologies. When placement of a thoracic endograft necessitates coverage of one or more of the great vessels, in situ laser fenestration is a safe and effective option for supra-aortic trunk revascularization. Certain anatomic factors may render laser fenestration more technically challenging, particularly depending on aortic arch type and branch vessel characteristics. Short-term and mid-term outcomes have shown promising results for mortality, stroke, and complication rates. Future developments may extend the utility of this approach and allow it to be applied to a more widespread set of patients with challenging anatomy.

Homemade fenestration and chimney techniques for the left subclavian artery revascularization during zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair

Background

To investigate the safety and efficacy of homemade fenestration and chimney techniques for the left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization during zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

Methods

From February 2017 to February 2021, 41 patients undergoing fenestration technique (group A) and 42 patients undergoing chimney technique (group B) to preserve the LSA during zone 2 TEVAR were enrolled in the present study. The procedure was indicated for dissections with unsuitable proximal landing zone with refractory pain and hypertension, rupture and malperfusion, and high-risk radiographic features. The baseline characteristics, peri-procedure, and follow-up clinical and radiographic data were recorded and analyzed. The primary endpoint was clinical success, and the secondary endpoints were rupture-free survival, LSA patency, and complications. Aortic remodeling, defined as patency, partial and complete thrombosis of the false lumen, was also analyzed.

Results

Technical success was achieved in 38 and 41 patients in groups A and B, respectively. Four intervention-related deaths were confirmed, two in each group. Immediate post-procedural endoleaks were detected in two and three patients in group A and B, respectively. No other major complications were found in either group, except for one retrograde type A dissection in group A. During follow-up, the initial clinical success rates were 90.24% and 92.86% in groups A and B, respectively. The primary and secondary mid-term clinical success rates were 87.5% and 90% in group A, and both of them were 92.68% in group B. Rupture-free survival and LSA patency were not significantly different between the two groups. The incidence of complete thrombosis in the aorta distal to the stent graft was 67.65% and 61.11% in groups A and B, respectively.

Conclusions

Apart from the lower clinical success rate of fenestration technique, both physician-modified techniques are available for LSA revascularization during zone 2 TEVAR and significantly promote favorable aortic remodeling.

Single branched endografts for the preservation of left subclavian artery in the treatment of zone II thoracic aortic lesions a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We investigated the safety and feasibility of single branched endografts in the treatment of zone II thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

METHODS

We performed a systematic research on Medline, Scopus and EMBASE for articles published up to February 2023. Primary endpoints included technical success, thirty-day mortality, stroke and spinal cord injury (SCI) as well as unassisted left subclavian artery (LSA) branch patency by the end of follow-up. Secondary endpoints included early thirty-day and persistent endoleaks, new onset dissection and reintervention by the end of follow-up.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies, three prospective case series and eleven retrospective case series comprised of 727 patients were finally included. The pooled technical success and thirty-day mortality rates were 94.86 % (95% CI: 90.95-97.86) and 0.14% (95% CI: 0.00-0.87). The thirty-day stroke and SCI rates were 0.45% (95% CI: 0.00-1.39) and 0.08% (95% CI: 0.00-0.99) respectively, while the unassisted LSA branch patency estimate was 99.12% (95% CI: 97.97-99.86). The early thirty-day and persistent endoleak rates were 5.19% (95% CI: 2.45-8.65) and 2.57% (95% CI: 0.36-6.02), whereas new onset dissections and reinterventions estimates were 0.94% (95% CI: 0.17-2.11) and 2.40% (95% CI: 0.41-5.42).

CONCLUSION

While we have displayed the safety and feasibility of single branched endografts in the treatment of zone II thoracic aortic lesions, physicians should be aware of the persistency displayed by early type I endoleaks eventually requiring re-intervention. The variations in device and lesion characteristics accompanied by the short-term follow-up presented in our review do not allow for definite conclusions to be drawn, necessitating further research through high-quality randomized controlled trials.

Chyle leak after transposition of the aberrant left vertebral artery via 1-debranching thoracic endovascular aortic repair: a case report

BACKGROUND

Although the transposition of the aberrant left vertebral artery (ALVA) in 1-debranching thoracic endovascular aortic repair requiring zone 2 coverage for thoracic aneurysm with ALVA is reported to be an effective option, there are few reports of complications associated with the transposition of the ALVA.

CASE PRESENTATION

An 87-year-old man underwent 1-debranching thoracic endovascular repair for a saccular thoracic aortic aneurysm with the aberrant left vertebral artery. Simultaneously, the transposition of the ALVA was performed to prevent cerebral complications because the left vertebral artery was dominant. Postoperative computed tomography revealed the reconstructed vertebral artery and no endoleak. However, a postoperative chyle leak occurred and was treated with lymphangiography.

CONCLUSION

Although the ALVA transposition is one of the better options, a chyle leak should be considered a serious complication of the procedure.

Efficacy of left subclavian artery revascularization strategies during thoracic endovascular aortic repair in patients with type B dissection: A single-center experience of 105 patients

Background

Left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is necessary to reduce postoperative complications in patients with Stanford type B aortic dissection and an insufficient proximal anchoring area. However, the efficacy and safety of different LSA revascularization strategies remain unclear. Here, we compared these strategies to provide a clinical basis for selecting an appropriate LSA revascularization method.

Methods

In this study, we included 105 patients with type B aortic dissection who were treated using TEVAR combined with LSA reconstruction in the Second Hospital of Lanzhou University from March 2013 to 2020. They were divided into four groups according to the method used for LSA reconstruction, namely, carotid subclavian bypass (CSB; n = 41), chimney graft (CG; n = 29), single-branched stent graft (SBSG; n = 21), and physician-made fenestration (PMF; n = 14) groups. Finally, we collected and analyzed the baseline, perioperative, operative, postoperative, and follow-up data of the patients.

Results

The treatment success rate was 100% in all the groups, and CSB + TEVAR was the most commonly used procedure in emergency settings compared with the other three procedures (P &lt; 0.05). The estimated blood loss, contrast agent volume, fluoroscopic time, operation time, and limb ischemia symptoms during the follow-up were significantly different in the four groups (P &lt; 0.05). Pairwise comparison among groups indicated that the estimated blood loss and operation time in the CSB group were the highest (adjusted P &lt; 0.0083; P &lt; 0.05). The contrast agent volume and fluoroscopy duration were the highest in the SBSG groups, followed by PMF, CG, and CSB groups. The incidence of limb ischemia symptoms was the highest in the PMF group (28.6%) during the follow-up. The incidence of complications (except limb ischemia symptoms) during the perioperative and follow-up periods was similar among the four groups (P &gt; 0.05) The median follow-up time of CSB, CG, SBSG, and PMF groups was significantly different (P &lt; 0.05), and the CSB group had the longest follow-up.

Conclusion

Our single-center experience suggested that the PMF technique increased the risk of limb ischemia symptoms. The other three strategies effectively and safely restored LSA perfusion in patients with type B aortic dissection and had comparable complications. Overall, different LSA revascularization techniques have their advantages and disadvantages.

A Systematic Review of Contemporary Outcomes from Aortic Arch In Situ Laser Fenestration During Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

BACKGROUND

In situ laser fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (L-FEVAR) is a novel and creative solution for complex aortic pathologies in the urgent and emergency setting. Outcomes of this technique, however, are poorly reported. We sought to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and outcomes of L-FEVAR in aortic arch pathologies.

METHODS

A systematic literature review and analysis were conducted in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses and Cochrane guidelines. A search was conducted using Google, PubMed, and Scopus to identify studies evaluating L-FEVAR. Two independent reviewers determined study inclusion. Case reports and series including < 10 patients were excluded. Reviewers also assessed the methodological quality and extracted data regarding outcomes. A meta-analysis of endoleak event rates was conducted using a fixed-effect model due to small sample size.

RESULTS

Eight studies met inclusion criteria between 2013 and 2021. Most studies were retrospective (87.5%) with median follow-up duration of 12.5 months (range 10-42). There were 440 patients included (range 15-148), mostly men (64%). Mean age was 61 years (range 53-68). Included patients were all symptomatic with L-FEVAR being technically successful in 93.3% of cases. The main indication for aortic arch intervention was aortic dissection. Single fenestrations occurred most frequently (68%), followed by triple (22%) then double fenestrations (9%). Meta-analysis of 8 studies (n = 440) demonstrated an endoleak event rate of 0.06 (95% confidence interval 0.04-0.09, P < 0.001) with no observed statistically significant heterogeneity of effects (Q = 7.91, P = 0.34). The median operative time was 162 min (range 53-252) with median length of stay of 10 days (range 7-17). Primary branch patency was 96.6%. Secondary patency rate was 97%. Pooled complication rates such as endoleak occurred in 4.8%, stroke in 2.0%, spinal cord ischemia in 0.2%, retrograde dissection in 0.9%, and 30-day death in 2.0%. Access complications occurred in 0.4%. Antiplatelet regimen was poorly reported in the study cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

In situ laser fenestration is a feasible, safe, and effective approach to treat aortic arch disease in patients who are unsuitable for open or custom-made endovascular means. High technical success and excellent short-term branch patency can be achieved. These single-institution series exhibit promising short-term outcomes. In a similar paradigm to investigational device exemptions studies for custom-made and physician modified endografts, these preliminary data make a persuasive argument for larger long-term multi-institutional prospective study of this promising technique.

Cover with caution: Management of the Left Subclavian Artery in TEVAR for trauma

BACKGROUND

Elective Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) with left subclavian artery coverage (LSA-C) without revascularization is associated with increased rates of ischemic stroke. In patients with blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) requiring TEVAR, LSA-C is frequently required in over one-third of patients. This study aimed to evaluate outcomes of TEVAR in BTAI patients with and without LSA-C.

METHODS

The largest existing international multicenter prospective registry of BTAI, developed and implemented by the Aortic Trauma Foundation, was utilized to evaluate all BTAI patients undergoing TEVAR from March 2016 to January 2021. Patients with uncovered left subclavian artery (LSA-U) were compared with patients who had left subclavian artery coverage with (LSA-R) and without (LSA-NR) revascularization.

RESULTS

Of the 364 patients with BTAI who underwent TEVAR, 97 (26.6%) underwent LSA-C without revascularization, 10 (2.7%) underwent LSA-C with revascularization (LSA-R). Late and all ischemic strokes were more common in LSA-NR patients than LSA-U patients ( p = 0.006, p = 0.0007). There was no difference in rate of early, late, or overall incidence of paralysis/paraplegia between LSA-NR and LSA-U. When compiled as composite central nervous system ischemic sequelae, there was an increased rate in early, late, and overall events in LSA-NR compared with LSA-U ( p = 0.04, p = 0.01, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

While prior studies have suggested the relative safety of LSA-C in BTAI, preliminary multicenter prospective data suggests there is a significant increase in ischemic events when the left subclavian artery is covered and not revascularized. Additional prospective study and more highly powered analysis is necessary.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

Endovascular treatment of complicated versus uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissection

OBJECTIVE

The study objective was to analyze the outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair performed for complicated and uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissections.

METHODS

Patients from WL Gore's Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair for acute type B aortic dissections were included, and data were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 5014 patients enrolled in the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment, 172 underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair for acute type B aortic dissections. Of these repairs, 102 were for complicated acute type B aortic dissections and 70 were for uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissections. There were 46 (45.1%) procedures related to aortic branch vessels versus 15 (21.4%) in complicated type B aortic dissections and uncomplicated type B aortic dissections (P = .002). The mean length of stay was 14.3 ± 10.6 days (median, 11; range, 2-75) versus 9.8 ± 7.9 days (median, 8; range, 0-42) in those with complicated type B aortic dissections versus those with uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissections (P < .001). Thirty-day mortality was not different between groups (complicated type B aortic dissections 2.9% vs uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissections 1.4%, P = .647), as well as aortic complications (8.8% vs 5.7%, P = .449). Aortic event-free survival was 62.9% ± 37.1% versus 70.6% ± 29.3% at 3 years (P = .696).

CONCLUSIONS

In the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment, thoracic endovascular aortic repair results for complicated type B aortic dissections versus uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissections showed that 30-day mortality and perioperative complications were equally low for both. The midterm outcome was positive. These data confirm that thoracic endovascular aortic repair as the first-line strategy for treating complicated type B dissections is associated with a low risk of complications. Further studies with longer follow-up are necessary to define the role of thoracic endovascular aortic repair in uncomplicated acute type B dissections compared with medical therapy. However, in the absence of level A evidence from randomized trials, results of the uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissection patient cohort treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair from registries are important to understand the related risk and benefit.

Favorable neurological outcomes in thoracic endovascular aortic repair with RELAY™ branched-An international perspective

BACKGROUND

While open surgical repair continues to be the mainstay option for aortic arch reconstruction, the associated mortality, morbidity, and high turn-down rates have led to a need for the development of minimally invasive options for aortic arch repair. Though RELAY™ Branched (Terumo Aortic, Inchinnan, UK) represents a promising option for complex endovascular aortic arch repair, neurological complications remain a pertinent risk. Herein we seek to present multicenter data from Europe documenting the neurological outcomes associated with RELAY™ Branched.

METHODS

Prospective data collected between January 2019 and January 2022 associated with patients treated with RELAY™ single-, double-, and triple-branched endoprostheses from centers across Europe was retrospectively analyzed with descriptive and distributive analysis. Follow-up data from 30 days and 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively were included. Patient follow-up was evaluated for the onset of disabling stroke (DS) and non-disabling stroke (NDS).

RESULTS

Technical success was achieved in 147 (99.3%) cases. Over 24 months period, in total, six (4.1%) patients suffered DS, and eight (5.4%) patients suffered NDS after undergoing aortic arch repair with RELAY™. All patients that developed postoperative DS had been treated with the double-branched RELAY™ endoprosthesis.

DISCUSSION

The data presented herein demonstrates that RELAY™ Branched is associated with favorable neurological outcomes and excellent technical success rates. Key design features of the endoprosthesis and good perioperative management can contribute greatly to mitigating neurological complications following endovascular aortic arch repair.

Comparison of techniques for left subclavian artery preservation during thoracic endovascular aortic repair: A systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis of both endovascular and surgical revascularization

Background

Currently, the optimal technique to revascularize the left subclavian artery (LSA) during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) remains controversial. Our study seeks to characterize early and late clinical results and to assess the advantages and disadvantages of endovascular vs. surgical strategies for the preservation of LSA.

Methods

PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library searches were conducted under the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analyses) standards. Only literature published after January 1994 was included. Studies reporting on endovascular revascularization (ER), surgical revascularization (SR) for LSA preservation were included. 30-day mortality and morbidity rates, restenosis rates, and rates of early and late reintervention are measured as outcomes.

Results

A total of 28 studies involving 2,759 patients were reviewed. All articles were retrospective in design. Single-arm analysis found no significant statistical differences in ER vs. SR in terms of 30-day mortality and perioperative complication rates. The mean follow-up time for the ER cohort was 12.9 months and for the SR cohort was 26.6 months, respectively. Subgroup analysis revealed a higher risk of perioperative stroke (4.2%) and endoleaks (14.2%) with the chimney technique compared to the fenestrated and single-branched stent approaches. Analysis of the double-arm studies did not yield statistically significant results.

Conclusion

Both ER and SR are safe and feasible in the preservation of LSA while achieving an adequate proximal landing zone. Among ER strategies, the chimney technique may presents a greater risk of neurological complications and endoleaks, while the single-branched stent grafts demonstrate the lowest complication rate, and the fenestration method for revascularization lies in an intermediate position. Given that the data quality of the included studies were relatively not satisfactory, more randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed to provide convincing evidence for optimal approaches to LSA revascularization in the future.

Does endovascular duration impact clinical outcomes in aortic arch repair? The RELAY™ branched international stance

Background

The high mortality and morbidity rates in surgical aortic arch repair are a barrier to therapy for a considerable proportion of patients with aortic arch aneurysm or dissection. There is hence a demand for the development and adoption of a minimally invasive alternative to aortic arch repair, such as thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Procedural duration is a key factor in the pathogenesis of complications in surgical aortic arch repair. Herein, we evaluate whether endovascular duration impacts neurological outcomes, target vessel patency, and reintervention rates in aortic arch TEVAR with RELAY™ Branched (Terumo Aortic, Inchinnan, UK), which is specifically developed for on-label use within the aortic arch.

Methods

Prospective data was collected between January 2019 and January 2022 on the clinical outcomes of TEVAR for aortic arch dissection and aneurysm with RELAY™ single-, double-, and triple branched endoprostheses from centers across Europe. They were then retrospectively analyzed with descriptive and distributive analysis. Follow-up data on the incidence of disabling stroke (DS), target vessel patency, and reintervention from 30 days and 6-, 12-, and 24 months postoperative was included in the analysis.

Results

147 (99.3%) of all 148 cases were successful. Over the 24 month follow-up period, in total 6 (4.1%) patients suffered DS, 24 (16.3%) required reintervention, and target vessel patency was exhibited in 118 (80.2%) patients. The modal endovascular duration was 100-150 min (in 64.6%, n = 95 cases). Analysis revealed that endovascular duration was associated with a lower likelihood of reintervention at 30 days, 6-, and 12 months (P = 0.011, P = 0.019, P = 0.037), a greater likelihood of target vessel patency at 6- and 24 months (P = 0.032, P = 0.035). No relationship between endovascular duration and DS was revealed.

Discussion

The data demonstrates that RELAY™ Branched is associated with promising clinical outcomes for on-label aortic arch TEVAR. The underlying mechanism linking endovascular duration and reintervention rates, or target vessel patency is likely multifactorial and complex. Given that TEVAR is carried out under general anesthetic only, it is unlikely that prolonged procedural duration has any major effect over neurological outcomes for arch TEVAR.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of stroke rates in patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair for descending thoracic aortic aneurysm and type B dissection

OBJECTIVE

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the stroke rates after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for descending thoracic aortic aneurysms and/or dissections.

METHODS

A systematic search of all the literature reported until September 2021 was performed according to the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines. The pooled perioperative stroke rates and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using fixed or random effect methods.

RESULTS

A total of 878 study titles were identified by the initial search strategy, of which 43 were considered eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis. A total of 5764 patients (63.5% male) were identified among the eligible studies. The pooled any stroke rate was 4.4% (95% CI, 3.60%-5.28%). However, after procedures without left subclavian artery (LSA) ostial coverage (eg, TEVAR deployed within or distal to zone ≥3), the stroke rate was 3.15% (95% CI, 2.21%-4.22%). For the patients with LSA coverage, the pooled stroke rate was 2.8% (95% CI, 1.69%-4.14%) for patients receiving left subclavian artery revascularization. However, the patients without LSA revascularization had a pooled estimated stroke incidence of 11.8% (95% CI, 5.85%-19.12%).

CONCLUSIONS

Stroke has been a common finding after TEVAR, especially with LSA coverage without revascularization, validating current clinical practice guidelines recommending routine revascularization, when feasible. Additional studies with larger patient numbers that provide separate data regarding the aortic pathology treated, the anatomic location of the stroke and their association with functional recovery and survival are needed.

RELAYTM Branched–International Results of Vessel Patency and Reintervention

Background

Surgical intervention remains the mainstay treatment for aortic arch aneurysm and dissection, but the high mortality and morbidity rates have led to a need for the development of minimally invasive alternatives to arch reconstruction. RELAY™ Branched (Terumo Aortic, Inchinnan, UK) represents a viable option for complex endovascular aortic arch repair. We present multi-center data from Europe documenting the efficacy of the endograft in terms of its target vessel patency and reintervention rates.

Methods

Prospective data collected between January 2019 and January 2022 associated with patients treated with RELAY™ single-, double-, and triple-branched endoprostheses from centers across Europe was retrospectively analyzed with descriptive and distributive analysis. Follow up data from 30 days and 6-, 12-, and 24 months postoperatively was included. Patient follow up was evaluated in terms of target vessel patency and reintervention rates.

Results

Technical success was achieved in 147 (99.3%) cases. Over 24 months period, target vessel patency was maintained in 80.2% (n = 118) of patients. Target vessel cannulation was achieved in 146 (99.3%) cases. Over the 24-month follow-up period, 30 reintervention procedures were required, of which 29 (97%) took place within the South Europe region which accounted for 19.6% (n = 29) of total cases. Zero reinterventions were required in patients that were treated with single- or triple-branched endoprostheses.

Discussion

The data presented herein demonstrates that RELAY™ Branched is a technically efficacious device for endovascular aortic arch repair and is associated with favorable target vessel patency and reintervention rates. Key design features of the endoprosthesis and good perioperative management can contribute greatly to mitigating reintervention and loss of vessel patency following endovascular aortic arch repair.

Left subclavian artery coverage during endovascular repair of thoracic aorta injury in trauma and non-trauma patients

PURPOSE

In thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), the left subclavian artery (LSA) is often occluded. Although most patients tolerate this, some develop ischemic symptoms to the brain or left upper extremity (LUE). A revascularization procedure may be associated with significant complications. The purpose of this review was to assess the incidence of LSA occlusion, resulting ischemic symptoms, and complications related to revascularization operations in trauma patients compared to non-trauma patients.

METHODS

Studies from 2010 to 2020 were fully reviewed if they discussed incidence of LSA coverage, LUE ischemia, carotid-subclavian bypass, or complications associated with carotid-subclavian bypass.

RESULTS

Seventeen articles were included in this analysis. A total of 167 patients were identified as trauma cases. Incidence of LSA occlusion in trauma was 91/167 (54%) compared to 281/1446 (19%) in the population exclusive of trauma (p < 0.001). Following LSA occlusion, the rate of LUE claudication/ischemia was 21/56 (38%) for trauma, compared to 12/193 (6%) in non-trauma cases (p < 0.001). The overall complication rate after carotid-subclavian rescue bypass was 29.2% (33/112), with phrenic nerve palsy (24%), recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (5%), and pseudoaneurysm (1.7%) being the most common.

CONCLUSION

LSA coverage following TEVAR is common and associated with significant complications, often requiring operative management. The incidence of ischemic complications after occlusion of the LSA is significantly higher in the trauma population. Revascularization procedures to correct the occlusion have a high rate of complications.

Outcomes of Endovascular Repair of Aortic Aneurysms with the GORE® Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis for Left Subclavian Artery Preservation

OBJECTIVE OR BACKGROUND

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair has emerged as the dominant paradigm for treatment of patients with descending thoracic aortic aneurysms. For aneurysms involving the aortic arch in the region of the left subclavian artery (LSA), branch vessel preservation to maintain blood flow to the LSA is recommended. Branched aortic endografts are an alternative to surgical revascularization of the LSA.

METHODS

Across 34 investigative sites, 84 patients with Zone 2 aneurysm were enrolled in a nonrandomized, prospective study of a single branched aortic endograft. The thoracic branch endoprosthesis device allows for graft placement proximal to the LSA and incorporates a single side branch for left subclavian perfusion.

RESULTS

Over half of the patients were male (63%). Their average age was 70 (±11) years. The aneurysm morphology was fusiform in 43 and saccular in 41 patients. The mean aneurysm diameter at screening was 56.2 mm. The mean follow up was 30 months (range 2.6 to 50.7 months). Reported here are the patient outcomes at 1 and 12 months. Pre-defined technical success with implantation of the device in landing Zone 2 was achieved in 92% (n=77) of patients. There were no cases of aortic rupture, lesion-related mortality, or new onset renal failure. There was no peri-operative (30-day) mortality. A single case each of permanent paraplegia and paraparesis occurred. Three patients experienced a procedure-related stroke. Through 12 months, four patients died; none of the deaths were adjudicated as related to the device or procedure. One aortic reintervention was required. A single case of aortic enlargement (core laboratory) was reported at 6 months. Type 1 (n=3) and III (n=5) endoleaks occurred in 9.8% of patients of which one (Type III) required reintervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this device study in patients with Zone 2 aneurysm demonstrate that early safety and efficacy outcomes are maintained up to 12 months after the endovascular procedure with low mortality and reintervention rates and an acceptable frequency of procedural complications, including neurologic complications.

Left Subclavian Artery Coverage is Not Associated with Neurological Deficits in Trauma Patients Undergoing Thoracic Endovascular Repair

BACKGROUND

Endovascular repair of the thoracic aorta (TEVAR) outcomes have been studied with interest in complications related to left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage in patients with atherosclerotic pathologies; however, specific data on the management of the LSA in a trauma population is lacking. The objective of this study is to evaluate outcomes following TEVAR for traumatic aortic injury based on LSA coverage.

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative thoracic endovascular aortic repair module (2010-2017) was analyzed. Patients were included if they had a traumatic aortic injury requiring TEVAR. Patients were placed in two groups based on coverage of the left subclavian artery. Patients were propensity score matched and the primary outcomes were cerebrovascular symptoms and spinal cord ischemia. Additional clinical and resource utilization outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

451 patients were included in the analysis. There were 268 patients in the LSA not covered group and 183 patients in the LSA covered group. The mean aortic injury grade was 2.88±0.056 vs 2.88±0.049 in the covered versus not-covered group (p=0.957). Glasgow coma scale and injury severity score were not different between the groups. There was no difference between groups for cerebrovascular symptoms or spinal cord ischemia, 1.4% vs 2.8% p=0.684 and 0% vs 2.1% p=0.247, after propensity score matching. Significant differences in access site complications and resource utilization were identified between groups.

CONCLUSION

This is the largest series to evaluate complications based on LSA coverage following TEVAR in trauma patients. Our data demonstrate that coverage of the LSA during TEVAR following blunt trauma is associated with no difference in CNS outcomes. As such, LSA revascularization strategies, while possible, are not directly supported by these data, and should be individualized based on each patient's specific clinical scenario.

Physician-Modified Endovascular Grafts for Zone-2 Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

OBJECTIVE

 This study aims to describe our technique and early experience with physician-modified endovascular grafts (PMEGs) for aortic arch diseases in zone 2. We used a total endovascular technique based on a single fenestrated endograft to preserve left subclavian artery (LSA) patency.

METHODS

 From December 2019 to August 2020, six consecutive patients with a variety of thoracic aortic diseases were treated with handmade fenestrated thoracic aortic grafts: four aortic dissections, one penetrating aortic ulcer, and one intramural hematoma. The planning, endograft modification, surgical technique, and follow-up of the patients were described. We evaluated immediate technical success and after 30 days, the LSA patency, Type-1 endoleak, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

 Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) was performed for zone 2 in all cases. Immediate technical success, defined as successful alignment of the LSA with a covered stent and no Type-1 endoleak, was achieved in all cases. Patients had a 30-day follow-up computed tomography, which demonstrated LSA patency and no Type-I endoleaks. To date, no strokes, left arm ischemia, paraplegia, or conversions to open surgery have been reported; one patient operated for acute Type B dissection died during the early follow-up.

CONCLUSION

 TEVAR for zone 2 with a PMEG to maintain LSA patency achieved technical success and early durability. It is expected that with longer follow-up and a larger number of cases, these results will be confirmed.

Covering/Overstenting of the left subclavian artery (LSA) in thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) to treat various thoracic/thoracoabdominal aortic lesions: Is revascularization of the left arm a must? (A retrospective cohort study with 12 years of experience to describe the real-world situation of daily clinical practice and the literature review)

Background: Pathologies of the descending thoracic aorta inwardly extended towards the aortic arch actually shorten the proximal landing zone for aortic prosthesis. This, in turn, worsens the feasibility of the aorta for endovascular therapeutic options of those pathologies. Objective: This work considers the blockage of the left subclavian artery (LSA) through endovascular treatment of the pathologies of the descending aorta as a main work question, which is based on the hypothesis that there is no necessity for primary standard revascularization of the LSA in TEVAR with LSA covering. The researchers have 12 years of experience in treatment of different thoracic aortic lesions. Their experience will also be reviewed in this paper. Design: Retrospective unicenter cohort study in consecutive patients order to describe the real-world situation of daily clinical practice Material: All the patients who had undergone endovascular, hybrid, or open operative therapy of variant pathologies of descending aorta were included in this study. Methods: Various parameters were investigated, including therapeutic procedures such as i) pure endovascular vs. hybrid; ii) year of therapy; iii) symptomatic vs. asymptomatic status of the patients; iv) variant epidemiological factors (age, sex, risk factors, mortality, and follow up); v) overstenting/blocking of the LSA; vi) complications of applied therapies; vii) further operations/interventions to treat such complications; viii) radiologic aortic measurements (such as lumen extensions, false lumen measurements, distance to the supra-aortic and visceral vessels); and ix) multiple other pathological features. Different statistical parameters were also examined. Survival was analysed by the Kaplan–Meier assessment in the group of whole patients vs. the group of over-stented patients. Here the analysis of variance is performed for the independent parameters for the revascularized patients—not the revascularized patients—who had undergone LSA coverage. For statistical approval, U-test was used. The p-value < 0.05 was considered significantly different. The literature review was achieved by a search in PubMed, Google scholar, Research Gate, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane library by using the following terms endovascular, TEVAR, revascularization, stroke, and left-subclavian-artery ischemia. The literature is classified accordingly in relation to the main topic. In fact, the literature undergoes further analysis if it goes with or against our hypothesis. Results: Overall, 112 patients were enrolled in the study. There was no significant difference comparing the not-revascularized vs. the revascularized group of patients, considering the consequences on cerebrovascular blood circulation (in particular, n=1 case [4.8 %] vs. no case [0 %]; p=1) or the spinal cord ischemia (n=2 [9.5 %] vs. n=1 [7.1 %]; p=1). As the main result, there was no case of manifest left arm ischemia and deaths (mortality, 0). Survival was in both groups as follows: 22 [95% CI, 14.154–29.904] months vs. 43 [95% CI, 33.655–51.921] months with no significant statistical difference (p>0.05) . The only statistically significant risk factor found was renal insufficiency (p, 0.028), but this too is considered a trend by the urgency of revascularization. Postoperatively, pneumonia showed a trend of higher frequency (p=0.058) in the revascularized cases (n=0 in the not-revascularized vs. n=3 [21.4 %] in the revascularized cases). There was no significant difference in the occurance of postoperative neurovascular complications (such as cerebrovascular accidents, spinal cord ischemia, or left arm ischemia) by comparing the groups of not-revascularized and revascularized patients. Conclusion: The revascularization of the overstented LSA due to TEVAR should be limited to certain indications, including i) the inadequate intracerebral circle of Willis; ii) the predominantly perfused left vertebral artery with inadequate blood perfusion via the right vertebral artery (e.g., by stenosis), iii) anatomic variance such as the left vertebral artery originating directly from the aortic arch (and must be blocked by TEVAR); iv) the need of an adequate left internal thoracic artery for coronary-artery-bypass grafting (CABG); v) the need of patent LSA for the dialysis shunt of the left arm. However, there is no appropriate evidence as yet based on sufficient study results achieved in trials with an advanced design (such as [double-]blind, multicenter randomized study) that appears to be urgently required.

The Mini-Cross Prefenestration for Endovascular Repair of Aortic Arch Pathologies

Objective: To examine the feasibility, integrity, efficacy, and safety of endovascular repair of the aortic arch pathologies with the mini-cross prefenestration (MCPF) on stent grafts.

Methods: First, to prove the feasibility of the MCPF, an in-vitro prefenestration experiment was conducted. Second, to examine the integrity of the MCPF stent grafts, a fatigue test was conducted. Then, the membranes and metal structures of stent grafts were examined by light microscopy and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Third, a clinical experiment was conducted to investigate the efficacy and safety of this novel technique (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04544579).

Results: All the 12 branch stents were successfully implanted and flared in vitro. After the fatigue test stimulating a 5-year cardiac cycle, no obvious disintegration or fracture was found in light microscopy or SEM. From December 2017 to February 2020, 26 patients with left subclavian arteries and/or left common carotid arteries involved received the novel technique. The endovascular repair with the MCPF was successfully performed on all the 26 (100%) patients. Eighteen (69.2%) patients underwent the reconstruction of the left subclavian artery (LSCA) only. The fenestrations of both the LSCA and left common carotid artery (LCCA) were conducted in 8 (30.8%) patients. Median operative time was 120 [interquartile range (IQR), 95–137.5] min and median revascularization time of the LSCA and LCCA was 30.5 (IQR, 22.8–42.0) s and 20.0 (IQR, 18.0–32.0) s separately. During the median follow-up duration of 38.9 (range, 18.8–44.2) months, one case needed an open surgery because of retrograde type A aortic dissection 3 months after implantation and no other complications or mortality occurred. The maximum aortic diameters were significantly decreased in patients with thoracic aortic dissection and thoracic aortic aneurysm (p < 0.05).

Conclusion: The existing evidence demonstrated the safety, rapid branch artery revascularization, and positive aortic remodeling of the novel technique. Long-term observation is warranted to prove the durability.

Early experience with the Bolton Relay Pro/Plus for physician-modified fenestrated TEVAR

BACKGROUND

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) can be challenging in cases involving the aortic arch and the visceral segment. We report our initial experience with fenestrated TEVAR (f-TEVAR) for thoracic aortic disease involving aortic branches using physician-modified stent grafts (PMSGs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between February 2019 and November 2020 nine patients were treated with a PMSG. Indication to treatment were a symptomatic acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD) in three cases, a penetrating aortic ulcer in three cases (two in zone 3 and one in zone 6), one case of an endoleak type I A after TEVAR, a chronic TBAD after TEVAR in one case and one case of a contained rupture of a thoracoabdominal aneurysm in zone 3. Pre-, intra- and postoperative clinical data were recorded.

RESULTS

The median patient age was 65 (IQR 60.5-71) years, and 8 (89%) patients were men. Nine stent grafts (six Bolton Relay Plus and three Bolton Relay Pro, Terumo Aortic, Vascutek Ltd., Inchinnan, United Kingdom) were deployed. Small fenestrations (8 mm) were created on table, median duration for on table stent graft modifications was 20 minutes (13-22). The technical success rate was 100%. Median operative time was 188 (116-252) minutes. No major adverse events of any sort occurred during the first 30-day postoperatively. There were no type I or type III endoleaks at the end of the procedure, and no cases of spinal cord ischemia. Two access related complications occurred (22%). After a median of 12 (range 5-12) months all patients survived and all target vessels remained patent with one case of fenestration-related type I endoleak, which required open conversion.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of our initial experience with f-TEVAR using PMSGs with the Bolton Relay stentgraft for the treatment of aortic diseases are acceptable. These results should be confirmed on larger patient cohorts.

A Single Center Study on the Risks of Peri-Intervention Stroke in Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) and Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Repair (EVAR)

(1) Background: The risk factors of peri-intervention stroke (PIS) in thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and endovascular abdominal aortic repair (EVAR) are different. This study aimed to compare the risks of PIS in both interventions. (2) Methods: Patients who had suffered a PIS related to TEVAR or EVAR from January 2008 to June 2015 in Songklanagarind Hospital were selected as the cases, while patients who had not suffered PIS were randomly selected to create a 1:4 case: control ratio for analysis. The associations between the factors from pre- to post-intervention and PISs in TEVAR or EVAR cases were analyzed by univariable analysis (p < 0.1). The independent risks of PIS were identified by multivariable analysis and presented in odds ratios (p < 0.05). (3) Results: A total of 17 (2.2%) out of 777 patients who had undergone TEVAR or EVAR experienced PIS, of which 9/518 (1.7%) and 8/259 (3.1%) cases were in TEVAR and EVAR groups, respectively. PIS developed within the first 24 h in nine (52.9%) cases. Large vessel ischemic stroke or watershed infarctions were the most common etiologies of PIS. The independent risks of PIS were the volume of intra-intervention blood loss (1.99 (1.88–21.12), p < 0.001) in the TEVAR-related PIS, and intervention time (2.16 (1.95–2.37), p = 0.010) and post-intervention hyperglycemia (18.60 (1.60–216.06), p = 0.001) in the EVAR-related PIS. There were no differences in the rate of PIS among the operators, intervention techniques, and status of the interventions performed. (4) Conclusion: The risks of PIS in TEVAR or EVAR in our center were different and possibly independent of the operator expertise and intervention techniques.